Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Com rebalance rework suggestion:

11 posts, 533 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort


5 years ago
The problem:
Lets cut it short: the commanders have two problems with com morph:
1.Module upgrades aren't cost effective. They have the worst cost performance in the game.
2.Some module upgrades don't synergy with one another, this applies mainly to damage modules and burning effects such as Hellfire Grenade.

This makes commanders effectively really bad at frontline combat, or overall risky to use at all. This is mainly because they have economy tied to them. Using commander at frontline is high risk, low reward gamble.

The number one is clearly a bigger problem and this suggestion is mainly aimed towards it, but it would be nice if number two was also addressed if/when coms get reworked.

The suggestion:
I want to keep current early game com performance close to the current performance. However, I want that an actually upgraded commanders to start match the metal investment they are given. I believe this can be achieved with modules, which scale based on commander level.

Basically the multipliers of the modules would be smaller than the current ones, but they would scale based on commander level. Effectively this would mean, that the more metal you give to the commander, the faster they start scaling as the commander gets more and more modules and the previous modules also give better bonus.

Ideally, I would want to make level 4 the meeting point between the module upgrades. This would mean that the level 2 and 3 commanders would be even weaker than the current level 2 or 3 commanders and level 4 commanders have similar performance, but level 5 and beyond the commanders would start get increasingly better.

Example:
  • Damage module: from 10% to 2,5%*level
  • Ablative armor: from 600 to 150*level
  • Autorepair: From 10 to 2,5*level
  • ...And so on

Of course there is some modules, that need to remain with fixed increase/decrease. These are modules that affect interaction between units such as range (Advanced Targeting System) and speed modules (High Power Servos). They could remain the same, or if they need a buff, the maximum number of these modules could be reduced and their overall increase could be increased. For example, rather than having 8X7,5% Advanced Targetting Systems, we could have only 6X10% Advanced Targetting Systems. Of course the speed maluses need to be adjusted accordingly to match.

Also, to limit the scaling, there should maybe be some kind of maximum level for commanders, I don't have any number in my mind right now. But if this model gets working, it will probably be figured out eventually.

I also have another suggestion: Armor class.
I would get rid off high density plating, and replace it with an armor class mechanic that can be selected at com level 2.
The mechanic is following: the player chooses either medium armor or assault armor. The medium armor is the base commander armor while assault armor would give increased health multiplier, but lowered base speed. By base speed, I mean that all % speed changes from modules are calculated by using it as a base.
Example:
  • Medium armor: 1Xhealth multiplier, base speed modifier 0%
  • Assault armor: 2Xhealth multiplier, base speed modifier -33%
  • --The numbers can be tweaked to match the balance better--

Likewise there could also be a Raider armor with lower base health and increased speed and the armor classes could be restricted to some chassisses, such as only guardian and Strike can get the assault armor, while engineer and Recon can get the Raider armor.

Overall I think this suggestion would improve commanders without wrecking the existing balance too much.

Suggestions? Feedback? Feel free to comment.
+3 / -0

5 years ago
I think side grade modules of today are bad, I also think infinite leveling is bad. I would like a level cap and only buff mods. Targeting, damage decrease speed, but you can just get speed with servos. High density plateing gives massive speed loss. I would prefer if the side grades were achieved by opertunity cost.

That said, my main gripe with commanders is that they don't scale and you need to commit hard to them. Once you have your 2 weapons, that's it, that's your playstyle with that com for the rest of the game. With units I can just build different units, with coms I can use the com in bad situations or abandon it.
+1 / -0

5 years ago
As someone who frequently upgrades their commander and keeps them near the action if not in front of the weaker units to tank I TOTALLY realize the cost for upgrades isn't effective. I mean compare the cost of Ablative Armor in terms of metal/health to using the same amount of metal to build units and the health they have which also comes with a source of damage and maybe an ability too!
+0 / -0

5 years ago
the problem is also having 1. super genralist cloak-tank-regen-speed-burstdps-coms, 2. cancerous stuff like napalm-missiles. i am completely fine with reworking coms, but they are fucking annoying and that shouldn´t get worse.
+1 / -0


5 years ago
quote:
the problem is also having 1. super genralist cloak-tank-regen-speed-burstdps-coms, 2. cancerous stuff like napalm-missiles. i am completely fine with reworking coms, but they are fucking annoying and that shouldn´t get worse.

There is currently definitely some problem with polarized commander builds, as only few of them are viable in any way.

The armor class suggestion is to ensure, that getting a huge combination of health and speed would not be easy, while builds like the Napalm-rocket guardian would remain the same if we keep range and speed modules as they are without scaling, though they will probably end up more though with other modules in combination.
+0 / -0
there has been and there is constant massive investment into unit balancing done. please tell me how you would like to balance an ultra-flexible unit in that context? have you ever played one of these games with an annoying unkillable trollcom? if you want rpg, get out.
+0 / -0


5 years ago
quote:
there has been and there is constant massive investment into unit balancing done. please tell me how you would like to balance an ultra-flexible unit in that context? have you ever played one of these games with an annoying unkillable trollcom? if you want rpg, get out.

First of all, no troll com is unkillable. Pretty much every factory except Sea and Rover have a proper antiheavy unit that can either disable or outright kill a commander. The sea isn't that big of a problem since coms themselves don't handle water combat well, but the rover is slightly larger problem.
Generally the same tools that can kill Dante, can also kill a commander.

Anyway.
The flexibility isn't exactly the problem with commander balance. The problem comes from being jack of all trades. Commanders should have flexibility to specialize to support certain role and in my opinion it should be encouraged. I also agree that they should not have ability to face all and any unit forces as they wish and I doubt my suggestion, if implemented would even cause that.

increased weapon range and mobility (and fire rate, but that doesn't apply much to commanders with their current weapons) are the sole things that will make any unit into all arounder that can kill unit armies by simply kiting them, besides super weapons and artillery units like Lance. This is one of the reasons why I decided to not add scaling to range and speed modifiers in my suggestion. With a level limit we could also ensure, that people can't add every single module in existence.
+1 / -0
1. Every Factory can kill trollcoms. (Rover and Ships too)

2. Way to many people dont know how, because these tactics are a little more difficult to use. And as long as a trollcom can dominate a part of the front because of fail-attempts to kill it. The coms shouldnt get a buff in any form.

3. i totaly support the idea to bring back the lvl limit for coms. Because before that trollcoms were never such a big problem as they are atm
+0 / -0
Buff coms`s mid-game strenth + make them less cancerous at the same time is something i would be completely fine with.

That just means massive time-investment for design + balancing. Wich invokes the fear of half-baked stuff in my head.
+0 / -0


5 years ago
Another way to balance coms would be making them reach their maximum performance for a cheaper price, but have lower max performance ceiling. This would also prevent com over-performance while making them viable units.
+1 / -0

5 years ago
PTrankraaar has actually put in a lot of work on that topic. You might also read his stuff.
+0 / -0